Library workers on the front lines of conspiracy theories in the US: one nationwide survey

IF 1.3 4区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Reference Services Review Pub Date : 2023-05-19 DOI:10.1108/rsr-11-2022-0056
Stephanie Beene, Katie Greer
{"title":"Library workers on the front lines of conspiracy theories in the US: one nationwide survey","authors":"Stephanie Beene, Katie Greer","doi":"10.1108/rsr-11-2022-0056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate whether and in what ways library workers in the United States encountered patrons espousing beliefs in conspiracy theories and, if so, to explore the effectiveness of the strategies they used to address information disorder during the interactions. Design/methodology/approach The study was designed with an exploratory qualitative approach. Data were collected via an online survey posted to national and state library association listservs, utilizing a self-selected sampling method. Researchers inductively and deductively analyzed results, developing predetermined themes based on the research questions, then iteratively integrating unexpected data during coding. Findings A total of 334 responses were received over two weeks. Data represent library workers from 43 states and Washington, D.C., including various types of libraries. Library workers interacted with patrons with conspiratorial thinking, and both library workers and patrons evidenced a range of emotions and motivations. Originality/value This is the first national study to survey library workers and whether they encountered patrons espousing conspiracy theories. While the sample size is small, themes elucidate various strategies that library workers use for interacting with patrons who express some level of conspiracy ideation.","PeriodicalId":46478,"journal":{"name":"Reference Services Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reference Services Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/rsr-11-2022-0056","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate whether and in what ways library workers in the United States encountered patrons espousing beliefs in conspiracy theories and, if so, to explore the effectiveness of the strategies they used to address information disorder during the interactions. Design/methodology/approach The study was designed with an exploratory qualitative approach. Data were collected via an online survey posted to national and state library association listservs, utilizing a self-selected sampling method. Researchers inductively and deductively analyzed results, developing predetermined themes based on the research questions, then iteratively integrating unexpected data during coding. Findings A total of 334 responses were received over two weeks. Data represent library workers from 43 states and Washington, D.C., including various types of libraries. Library workers interacted with patrons with conspiratorial thinking, and both library workers and patrons evidenced a range of emotions and motivations. Originality/value This is the first national study to survey library workers and whether they encountered patrons espousing conspiracy theories. While the sample size is small, themes elucidate various strategies that library workers use for interacting with patrons who express some level of conspiracy ideation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国图书馆工作人员站在阴谋论的第一线:一项全国性调查
本研究的目的是调查美国图书馆工作人员是否以及以何种方式遇到支持阴谋论信仰的顾客,如果是这样,则探讨他们在互动过程中用于处理信息混乱的策略的有效性。设计/方法/方法本研究采用探索性定性方法设计。数据是通过在线调查收集的,该调查发布在国家和州图书馆协会的列表服务器上,采用自行选择的抽样方法。研究人员归纳和演绎分析结果,根据研究问题制定预定主题,然后在编码过程中迭代整合意外数据。调查结果在两周内共收到334份回复。数据代表了43个州和华盛顿特区的图书馆工作人员,包括各种类型的图书馆。图书馆工作人员与具有阴谋思想的读者互动,图书馆工作人员和读者都表现出一系列的情绪和动机。这是第一个调查图书馆工作人员以及他们是否遇到支持阴谋论的顾客的全国性研究。虽然样本量很小,但主题阐明了图书馆工作人员与表达某种程度阴谋思想的顾客互动时使用的各种策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Reference Services Review
Reference Services Review INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Reference Services Review (RSR ) is a quarterly, refereed journal dedicated to the enrichment of reference knowledge and the advancement of reference services. RSR covers all aspects of reference functions, including automation of reference services, evaluation and assessment of reference functions and sources, models for delivering quality reference services in all types and sizes of libraries, development and management of teaching/learning activities, promotion of information literacy programs, and partnerships with other entities to achieve reference goals and objectives. RSR prepares its readers to understand and embrace current and emerging technologies affecting reference functions, instructional services and information needs of library users.
期刊最新文献
Onboarding for liaison librarians: building community and practice Campus entrepreneurs’ research habits and needs: a five-year study Affective dimensions of academic librarians’ experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic: experiences and lessons learned for information literacy The framing of authority in the ACRL framework on information literacy: multidisciplinary perspectives on truth, authority, expertise and belief Starting in-house copyright education programs: commonalities and conclusions from two southeastern US academic libraries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1